Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

UC Riverside

UC Riverside Previously Published Works bannerUC Riverside

Efficacy and safety of two incobotulinumtoxinA injection intervals in cervical dystonia patients with inadequate benefit from standard injection intervals of botulinum toxin: Phase 4, open-label, randomized, noninferiority study

Abstract

IntroductionSome patients with cervical dystonia (CD) receiving long-term botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) therapy report early waning of treatment benefit before the typical 12-week reinjection interval.

Methods

This phase 4, open-label, randomized, noninferiority study (CD Flex; NCT01486264) compared 2 incobotulinumtoxinA injection schedules (Short Flex: 8 ± 2 weeks; Long Flex: 14 ± 2 weeks) in CD patients. Previous BoNT-responsive subjects who reported acceptable clinical benefit lasting < 10 weeks were recruited. Efficacy and safety were evaluated after 8 injection cycles. The primary endpoint was change in Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) severity subscale 4 weeks after the eighth injection. Secondary endpoints included TWSTRS total and subscale scores. Immunogenicity was assessed in a subset of patients.

Results

Two hundred eighty-two CD patients were randomized and treated (Short Flex, N = 142; Long Flex, N = 140), and 207 completed the study. Significant improvements in TWSTRS severity from study baseline to 4 weeks after cycle 8 were observed in both the Short Flex (4.1 points; P < 0.0001) and Long Flex (2.4 points; P = 0.002) groups; Short Flex was noninferior to Long Flex (LS mean difference = 1.4 points; 95% CI = [-2.9, 0.1] < Δ = 2.0). Key secondary endpoints favored Short Flex intervals. Adverse events (AEs) were comparable between groups. There was no secondary loss of treatment effect.

Conclusion

Injection cycles < 10 weeks for incobotulinumtoxinA are effective (and noninferior to longer intervals) for treating CD patients with early waning of clinical benefit. Shorter injection intervals did not increase AEs or lead to loss of treatment effect.

Many UC-authored scholarly publications are freely available on this site because of the UC's open access policies. Let us know how this access is important for you.

Main Content
For improved accessibility of PDF content, download the file to your device.
Current View